This invention relates to the field of the book leveling methods, and more particularly, this invention relates to book leveling criteria used to label leveled reading books.
It is well known that learning to read is a developmental process where students pass through developmental stages at their own rate as compared to others in the same grade group and classroom environment. There are, however, some generalizations that can be made about different reading levels for students at these early stages at around kindergarten levels and passing through upper emergent, early fluency and fluency levels at grades 3-5. For example, most students entering the first grade from a kindergarten and pre-primer level read at a reading level of A-C on a Fountas and Pennell (FandP) level, about 1-4 on a Reading Recovery(copyright) level, and A-1 through 4 on a Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) level for these corresponding book leveling methods. These different book leveling methods have been formulated by teachers, instructors and others skilled in the art to assist them in determining various reading strategies for individuals and/or groups of students. Thousands of reading books and other instructional books in a reading library have been leveled to aid teachers and instructors in selecting what books should be chosen for reading assignments by particular individuals, classroom groups or other instructional groups using a reading library.
These book leveling methods include the well known Reading Recovery(copyright), Fountas and Pennell (FandP), and Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) book leveling methods. One of the better known methods is the Fountas and Pennell book leveling method. Details of that particular book leveling method can be found in two well known textbooks entitled, Matching Books to Readers: Using Leveled Books in Guided Reading, K-3, Heinemann, 1999, and Guided Reading: Good First Teaching for All Children, Heinemann, 1996. Another well known textbook is Developmental Reading Assessment Resources Guide, Celebration Press, 1997.
In one prior art attempt to match a student""s reading level to a particular book readability, U.S. Pat. No. 3,680,229 to Serrie et al. discloses the use of two series of distinctive corresponding symbols. One of the series of symbols is assigned to a student on the basis of a student""s reading level. The second series of symbols is assigned as based on reading difficulty. Identical symbols of the two series indicates that a particular book meets the reading level of a student. This provides some correlation for matching reading levels of individual students from primary grade level up to junior high school grade levels with the reading difficult of library books, text and the like. This allows an individual student to select, read and comprehend books of different complexity to match their current reading and comprehension abilities. This system provides some control over the use of one particular leveling method, if chosen, relative to the reading system.
One of the drawbacks of current leveling methods, however, is the large number of commercially available leveling methods as described above. Often, one set of books might be leveled using one book leveling method and another set of books may be leveled using a second book leveling method. Thus, a teacher or instructor would be required to consult different book leveling lists to determine which instructional reading level corresponded to a particular book. Also, a teacher or instructor would have to consult a leveling correlation table when a book that had been leveled using one book leveling method was compared to another book that had been leveled using a second or even a third book leveling method. This creates much hardship to the teacher or instructor. Also, some libraries have thousands of books and it is a great burden to determine at what level each book is categorized, let alone know the instructional reading level of a book at different book leveling methods.
The present invention advantageously provides a system and method of correlating leveling criteria to label leveled reading books in a manner that is efficient and inexpensive without resorting to time consuming leveling correlation tables and/or different leveling charts and lists that display a large number of books. The system includes a computer with a data input, such as a keyboard and mouse, and a printer for printing label sheets either in black and white or in color. In the system and method of the present invention, the instructional reading level of a selected book leveling method is input into a data entry field of a user interface. A processor correlates the instructional reading level that has been input with the instructional reading levels of other book leveling methods contained in a data store to produce correlated instructional reading levels. A user can select one or more correlated instructional reading levels for printing on a label for application onto a reading book.
In one aspect of the present invention, the instructional reading level can be input by accessing a drop down menu and selecting an instructional reading level. A background color corresponding to a label color to be printed based on the selected instructional reading levels can be user selected and displayed as a background on the user interface. Custom data can be input to be printed on each label. This custom data can include such information as the name of the school, use of other leveling methods, clarification of leveling methods, and related information. This custom data can be maintained even after changing instructional reading levels to be printed on labels. It is also possible to select a row and column for printing labels on prearranged label sheets.
A user interface is also displayed for correlating book leveling criteria to label leveled reading books. The user interface includes a label section for displaying correlated instructional reading levels of predetermined book leveling methods. A search section allows entry of instructional reading levels to be correlated.